Arizona police ordered to check documents of Latin Americans
For the authorities of the state of Arizona, the new law became another attempt to cope with a long-standing and pressing problem – illegal immigration. Mexicans come to the United States in hundreds of thousands per year, and not all of them are guided by the intention to live honestly in a prosperous country. Many problems of the state are associated with the constant influx of immigrants: crime, drug trafficking, smuggling, as well as numerous violations of labor laws, since for unscrupulous entrepreneurs, illegal immigrants are often the cheapest labor.
Four years ago, the administration of George Bush already made an attempt to take control of the border with Mexico. At that time, the Senate legalized the construction of various barrier structures along the border in Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico – from ordinary moats with water and tall stone walls (the first such structures began to appear back in 1994) to high-tech "virtual fences," so named because of towers with surveillance cameras and motion sensors. At the same time, those who had already entered the United States and lived in the country for more than five years were given a chance to legalize – provided they had no ties to the criminal underworld.
However, the simple and seemingly brilliant scheme turned out to have at least three very serious flaws. First, it provoked indignation from various international human rights organizations, greatly displeased the Mexican authorities, outraged religious figures, and worried environmentalists. Environmental defenders, fearing that ditches and the light from floodlights would cause irreparable damage to the region's fauna, even proposed replacing the walls with thickets of cacti that would prevent smugglers from getting through. Everyone else was more concerned about the moral side of the issue: the approach of the American authorities to ensuring border security was called medieval.
The second flaw was that implementing the project turned out to be much more difficult than drafting it. Owners of border land plots entered into numerous lawsuits with the companies constructing the structures; there was not enough money for building the walls, although about three billion dollars had been allocated from budgets at various levels. And there was also a mismatch with labor: representatives of working-class professions in border areas were mostly the same people from Mexico, albeit legally residing in the United States.
And only after hundreds of kilometers of fences had grown along the border did the third flaw become known: by the time a signal from the fence towers reaches the nearest border guards, it is already too late to intercept border violators.
In short, despite all efforts, the situation improved only very slightly. The fierceness of criminal "showdowns" between Mexican drug cartels still frightened the Arizona authorities, and last April they even asked to send military reinforcements to the border. Already then, state legislators thought about not relying on federal authorities but trying to solve the issue of combating crime and illegal immigration through local measures. The result of reflections on this topic was a bill, according to which the police can (and must) determine the status of any person against whom there are suspicions that he is in the country illegally. Police officers are required to check documents of anyone whose appearance or behavior seems suspicious to law enforcement.
This idea did not sit well with public figures and representatives of the Latin American community. Obviously, the basis for doubts about the status of a person who catches the eye of an Arizona police officer will be his racial and national affiliation. If suspects of violating immigration laws are selected on this basis, police interest could attract about every third resident of Arizona.
And here the question arises: do such principles of security enforcement violate the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens and residents, who will have to carry documents with them in case of a check? Nevertheless, the bill was signed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. The new rules are to take effect in three months.
For our compatriots, there is nothing surprising in Arizona's innovations: examples of a similar approach to controlling compliance with immigration laws can be seen every day on the streets of Russian cities. But in the United States, nothing like this has happened for many decades, and the controversial measures have divided America into two camps.
The supporters of the reform are mainly Republicans. Senator from Arizona John McCain expressed full support for Jan Brewer. Interestingly, when the elderly Republican was running for President of the United States, he demonstrated a somewhat different position, reminding in campaign videos of the exploits of Mexicans who fought on the side of the United States in various wars. In this way, he hoped to secure the support of a certain category of voters. Now, as McCain tries to be re-elected for a new term in the Senate, he has chosen a new, more conservative line of behavior. Whether voters will appreciate it – the elections will show.
McCain is echoed by William Kristol, editor-in-chief of The Weekly Standard, who stated that the new law could lead only to isolated cases of violations of anyone's rights. More moderate conservative politicians, however, believe that the focus should be on border security, not on checking documents of suspicious passersby. And making changes to federal legislation seems to them an untimely idea.
There is enough time before the new Arizona law takes effect for its opponents to take action to protect the rights of Latinos. Moreover, the Mexican government is ready to provide any support in this endeavor, and the US President is not thrilled with the law signed by Brewer. However, there is a rational grain in it. For instance, the part of the law that provides for strict penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants has drawn almost no criticism.
The immigration reform promised by the Democrats could be Barack Obama's finest hour. All Americans want to reduce crime, stop smuggling flows, and defeat drug traffickers. Achieving all this without harming either immigrants or those born in the US has eluded all of the current president's predecessors. And Obama likes to take on such challenges and is not afraid of unpopular measures – let him try.
Yulia SAVITSKAYA.
Lenta.ru